Local firm continues legal battle with Johnson & Johnson

A St. Louis jury ruled in favor of a woman who claims years of using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder caused her cancer, and she received over $70 million. Susana Victoria Perez (@susana_vp) has more.
Buzz60

Beasley Allen Law Firm’s legal battle against Johnson & Johnson continues, this time in federal court.

Beasley Allen attorney Leigh O’Dell was named co-lead counsel last month for a multi-district litigation in Johnson & Johnson’s home state of New Jersey. Like previous suits, the lawsuits allege the Johnson & Johnson is liable for the company’s talcum powder possibly increasing the risk for ovarian cancer when used genitally by women.

“I feel very honored to serve on behalf of the thousands of women who are suffering and many dying of ovarian cancer as a result of their long-term use of talcum powder,” O’Dell said in a statement. “Despite numerous credible scientific studies showing an increased risk of ovarian cancer, Johnson & Johnson has never warned users of their Baby Powder or other talcum-powder based products.

"Internal documents make clear that J&J and its principal supplier of talc have been aware of the risks of ovarian cancer for many years. Rather than act responsibly and warn consumers, Johnson & Johnson suppressed safety information and actively misled women about the dangers of genital talc use. The company’s conduct is reprehensible, and we look forward to continuing to pursue justice on behalf of these deserving women and their families.”

O’Dell was selected for the role after a round of applications that included firms across the country.

In Missouri this year, Johnson & Johnson lost the first three lawsuits of a 64-woman joint lawsuit helmed by Beasley Allen.

Ovarian cancer survivors Gloria Ristesund and Deborah Giannecchini were awarded $55 million and $70.075 million, respectively. In February, the family of deceased Birmingham native Jacqueline Fox was awarded $72 million in February. Fox died of ovarian cancer months earlier after testifying to using Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower — the only two J&J powders to contain talc — all her life.

New Jersey, on the other hand, has been tough sledding for talc litigation.

Ted Meadows, co-lead counsel for Beasley Allen’s Missouri litigation, had two state court cases against Johnson & Johnson dismissed in New Jersey in September a month before they were supposed to go to trial, but Beasley Allen founder Jere Beasley said the appeals process is ongoing.

Johnson & Johnson spokeswoman Carol Goodrich released a statement on the ruling saying, “The court’s decision today appropriately reflects the science and facts at issue in this litigation,” and that “science, research, clinical evidence and decades of studies by medical experts around the world continue to support the safety of cosmetic talc.”

It’s true that scientific studies are not exactly unanimous in linking female genital talc use to ovarian cancer. A leading study published in May by Dr. Daniel Cramer of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston found a 33 percent associated risk, but after decades of study, the link still remains inconclusive.

(Photo: Getty Images/Hemera)

However, Johnson & Johnson remains open to attack for negligence by not putting warning labels on its two kinds of talcum powder to warn of potential risk.

Particularly damning for the health care product company has been the release of internal memos in which a paid medical medical consultant advised Johnson & Johnson to heed the findings of particular scientific studies linking talc to ovarian cancer.

“At that time there had been about nine studies (more by now) published in the open literature that did show a statistically significant association between hygienic talc use and ovarian cancer. Anybody who denies this risks that the talc industry will be perceived by the public like it perceives the cigarette industry: denying the obvious in the face of all evidence to the contrary,” the 1997 memo reads.

Goodrich said her company plans to appeal the Missouri verdicts, but Meadows said Beasley Allen is appealing the New Jersey dismissals, “because we think they’re wrong and we think we’ll get it overturned.”